1 / 30

3D-QSAR Analysis of the interactions of a Diverse Set of Ligands with Chiral HPLC Receptors

3D-QSAR Analysis of the interactions of a Diverse Set of Ligands with Chiral HPLC Receptors. Applying our recently developed enantiophore approach to QSAR analysis, a PLS model describing the interaction of 200 molecules with a chiral HPLC receptor (Whelk-OI) has been created

sawyer
Télécharger la présentation

3D-QSAR Analysis of the interactions of a Diverse Set of Ligands with Chiral HPLC Receptors

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 3D-QSAR Analysis of the interactions of a Diverse Set of Ligands with Chiral HPLC Receptors • Applying our recently developed enantiophore approach to QSAR analysis, a PLS model describing the interaction of 200 molecules with a chiral HPLC receptor (Whelk-OI) has been created • In this study, « 2-points » enantiophores are based on calculation of three-dimensional grid-independent descriptors • A model was obtained with a cross-validated correlation coefficient q2 = 0.73 and r2 = 0.76

  2. Procedure 1) Compounds -> 2) Grid -> 3) Descriptors -> 4) Data Analysis Compound selection 1 Corina: Generation of 3D coordinates 3D structures 2 Grid calculations 3 Training data set 3) Transformation of interaction energies into receptor descriptors (binning) 4 Data analysis (PLS) Interaction energies Model Log(alpha)=a1 x S1 + a2 x S2 + a3 x S3 …..

  3. Compound selection • 200 diverse molecules are extracted from ChirBase (alpha values vary from 1.00 to 13) • Structures are Converted to 3D by using Corina tool of the Tsar 3.3 software package and imported in Grid • Same analytical conditions (80:20 Hexane / 2-PrOH) • We tried to form a diverse data set 1) Compounds-> 2) Grid -> 3) Descriptors -> 4) Data Analysis

  4. Choosing the Probes of the Grid Chiral Receptor amide Lipophile • Grid is generated by : • - Dry (Hydrophobic) • - O (carbonyl oxygen, H-bond acceptor) • - N (amide nitrogen, H-bond donor) 1) Compounds-> 2) Grid -> 3) Descriptors -> 4) Data Analysis

  5. Grid Approach • Each molecule is positioned in a grid box. • The program Grid calculates the interaction energy of a probe atom with each molecule at points on a grid surrounding the molecules • Probes represent the potential receptor sites Grid Software is available from Molecular Discovery Ltd Probes: Acceptor Donor Hydrophobe (Lipophile) 0.3 A between grid points 1) Compounds-> 2) Grid -> 3) Descriptors -> 4) Data Analysis

  6. Transformation of grid energies into descriptors coordinates of the grid points energies at grid point Grid • Compute the products of the energy values for all pairs of nodes within specified distance ranges (0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5 ….) • For each distance bin, we keep the highest product x y z -5 -2 -9 -5 -5 3 Molecule -0.001 -0.007 Probe Negative energies. correspond to favorable interactions 3 probes: L (Lipophile), D (H-donor), A (H-acceptor) Fast: few minutes / molecule Processing data grid 1) Compounds-> 2) Grid -> 3) Descriptors -> 4) Data Analysis

  7. Transformation of grid energies into descriptors Acceptor - 2.3 kcal/mol 3Å D Donor 3Å - 5.8 kcal/mol A highest node-node binding is retained A 3Å - 3.5 kcal/mol D - 3.7 kcal/mol Couple of probes are selected in order to represent the best potential interactions with the receptor binding site (highest binding affinity). 1) Compounds-> 2) Grid -> 3) Descriptors -> 4) Data Analysis

  8. Resulting Descriptor Data file Grid data are thus converted into inter-feature distances: AA: Acceptor-Acceptor DD: Donor – Donor LL: Lipophile – Lipophile AD: Acceptor – Donor AL Acceptor – Lipophile DL: Donor - lipophile 6 pairs of recognition sites (probes) X 20 distance ranges (0 to 10 A) = 120 descriptors for each molecule 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5,3 … AA1, AA2, …AA20 DD1, DD2, …DD20 LL1, LL2,….LL20 AD1, AD2,….AD20 AL1, AL2, …AL20 DL1, DL2,….DL20 1) Compounds-> 2) Grid -> 3) Descriptors -> 4) Data Analysis

  9. x2 y2 y1 PLS Approach • Plot data in K-Dimensional space - Orthogonal components Maximize the covariance x3 y3 Build new X Matrix T= XW weights Multivariate regression x1 Inputs Y=TQ+E Outputs X1,X2..Xn Y regression coefficients noise enantioselectivities Descriptors Y=XB+E (B=WQ) predictive regression model 1) Compounds-> 2) Grid -> 3) Descriptors -> 4) Data Analysis

  10. PLS Results (6 components) • Performed using full cross-validation (leave one-out method: one entry is removed and model is rebuilt) • Model with the optimum number of PLS components (6), corresponding to the lowest predictive error sum of squares value was selected • Predictive ability of the model: Q2 = 0.73 • Correlation coefficient (Explained variance / Original variance): R2 = 0.76 It should be pointed that this model has been obtained across diverse data sources which originally contain a lot of noise 1) Compounds-> 2) Grid -> 3) Descriptors -> 4) Data Analysis

  11. Predictions of the model 1) Compounds-> 2) Grid -> 3) Descriptors -> 4) Data Analysis

  12. PLS factor contributions (regression coefficients ) Log(alpha)= a1 x AL1 + a2 x AL2 + a3 x AL3 ….. • Express the contribution of the descriptors to the model • PLS weights represent features important on receptor Short distance (2A) Distance increases Acceptor - lipophile Positive contributions Negative contributions 1) Compounds-> 2) Grid -> 3) Descriptors -> 4) Data Analysis

  13. Putative favorable sites on receptor Lipophile Lipophile Acceptor Short distance 1) Compounds-> 2) Grid -> 3) Descriptors -> 4) Data Analysis

  14. PLS factor contributions (regression coefficients ) Donor - lipophile 9 A 4 A 3 A 1) Compounds-> 2) Grid -> 3) Descriptors -> 4) Data Analysis

  15. Putative favorable sites on receptor Lipophile Donor Lipophile 1) Compounds-> 2) Grid -> 3) Descriptors -> 4) Data Analysis

  16. PLS factor contributions (regression coefficients ) 7 A Lipophile - lipophile 3 A 5 A 1) Compounds-> 2) Grid -> 3) Descriptors -> 4) Data Analysis

  17. Putative favorable sites on receptor Lipophile Lipophile Lipophile 1) Compounds-> 2) Grid -> 3) Descriptors -> 4) Data Analysis

  18. Acceptor - Acceptor 3-3.5 A Donor - Donor Negative contributions 1) Compounds-> 2) Grid -> 3) Descriptors -> 4) Data Analysis

  19. Sites on receptor 2 Acceptors 1 Donor 1) Compounds-> 2) Grid -> 3) Descriptors -> 4) Data Analysis

  20. External prediction data set • 28 molecules • Analytical conditions (80:20 Hexane / 2-PrOH) as chosen for the data set model • Poor alpha predictions: 10 molecules • Excellent alpha predictions: 12 molecules • Rather good prediction : 6 molecules 1) Compounds-> 2) Grid -> 3) Descriptors -> 4) Data Analysis

  21. Examples (prediction set) In a given group of similar compounds, the same tendency can be found between experimental and predicted values alpha experimental 1.23 1.29 1.47 2.18 Alpha predicted 1.22 1.24 1.38 1.60 1) Compounds-> 2) Grid -> 3) Descriptors -> 4) Data Analysis

  22. Examples (prediction set) alpha experimental 1.08 1.13 1.30 Alpha predicted 1.00 1. 16 1.25 1) Compounds-> 2) Grid -> 3) Descriptors -> 4) Data Analysis

  23. Examples (prediction set) Poor predictions: alpha exp: 1.69 alpha pred: 5.4 alpha exp: 1.04 alpha pred: 1.60 Remark: Compounds poorly predicted contains original chemical features not found in the molecules of the model 1) Compounds-> 2) Grid -> 3) Descriptors -> 4) Data Analysis

  24. Prediction set with extreme alpha values (=1.00 or > 3.00)(mixture of analytical conditions) • 22 molecules with excellent separation (alpha value > 3) • Predictions: - 17 molecules with alpha > 2.00 - 5 molecules with alpha > 1.08 and alpha < 1.15 – contain original chemical features not included in the model • 31 unresolved molecules (alpha = 1.00) • Predictions: - 15 molecules with alpha = 1.00 or < 1.08 : - 15 molecules with alpha > 1.1 and alpha < 2.5: • Best prediction performance for molecules • providing high enantioselectivities 1) Compounds-> 2) Grid -> 3) Descriptors -> 4) Data Analysis

  25. Some good predictions (data set with alpha = 1.00) 1) Compounds-> 2) Grid -> 3) Descriptors -> 4) Data Analysis

  26. Some good predictions (data set with alpha > 3.00) 1) Compounds-> 2) Grid -> 3) Descriptors -> 4) Data Analysis

  27. Some insights afforded by the model Log(alpha)=a1 x AA1 + a2 x AA2 + … b1 x AD1+ ….. • Applying PLS model contributions to molecules may help to explain difference of enantioselectivity alpha exp = 1.29 alpha pred = 1.24 alpha exp = 2.37 Alpha pred= 2.63 Molecule 1 Molecule 2 Comparison of individual PLS factor contributions 1) Compounds-> 2) Grid -> 3) Descriptors -> 4) Data Analysis

  28. Individual PLS factor contributions Log(alpha)=a1 x AA1 + a2 x AA2 + … Molecule 2: Positive effect of Donor - Donor on molecule 2 at long distance 9.5-10 A Acceptor – Acceptor on receptor a2xAA2 Molecule 2 a2xAA2 Molecule1 1) Compounds-> 2) Grid -> 3) Descriptors -> 4) Data Analysis

  29. Enantioselectivity contribution plot • Interaction points are color coded according to the enantioselectivity contribution as given by the PLS model • Blue regions increase enantioselectivities

  30. Other applications of Molecular Interaction fields Property Predictions on a given receptor: Example: Chirobiotic R High enantioselectivity for amino acids Most negative interaction provided by Grid: NH3+ -20.4774 kcal/mol COO- -14.1688 kcal/mol For whelk receptor: NH3+ -10.0489 kcal/mol COO- -7.5354 kcal/mol

More Related